Fast track to stroke unit for patients not eligible for acute intervention, a case-control register study on 1066 patients.

Stroke patients not eligible for acute intervention often have low priority and may spend long time at the emergency department (ED) waiting for admission. The aim of this retrospective case-control register study was to evaluate outcomes for such "low priority" stroke patients who were transported via Fast Track directly to the stroke unit, according to pre-specified criteria by emergency medical service (EMS). The outcomes of Fast Track patients, transported directly to stroke unit (cases) were compared with the outcomes of patients who fulfilled these critera for Fast Track, but instead were transported to the ED (controls). In all, 557 cases and 509 controls were identified. The latter spent a mean time of 237 min in the ED before admission. The 90-day mortality rate was 12.9% for cases and 14.7% for controls (n.s.). None of the secondary outcome events differed significantly between the groups: 28-day mortality rate; death rate during hospitalisation; proportion of pneumonias, falls or pressure ulcers; or health-related outcomes according to the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. These findings indicates that the Fast Track to the stroke unit by an EMS is safe for selected stroke patients and could avoid non-valuable time in the ED.

Interrupted transport by the emergency medical service in stroke/transitory ischemic attack: A consequence of changed treatment routines in prehospital emergency care.

BACKGROUND: The discovery that not all patients who call for the emergency medical service (EMS) require transport to hospital has changed the structure of prehospital emergency care. Today, the EMS clinician at the scene already distinguishes patients with a time-critical condition such as stroke/transitory ischemic attack (TIA) from patients without. This highlights the importance of the early identification of stroke/TIA. AIM: To describe patients with a final diagnosis of stroke/TIA whose transport to hospital was interrupted either due to a lack of suspicion of the disease by the EMS crew or due to refusal by the patient or a relative/friend. METHODS: Data were obtained from a register in Gothenburg, covering patients hospitalised due to a final diagnosis of stroke/TIA. The inclusion criterion was that patients were assessed by the EMS but were not directly transported to hospital by the EMS. RESULTS: Among all the patients who were assessed by the EMS nurse and subsequently diagnosed with stroke or TIA in 2015, the transport of 34 of 1,310 patients (2.6%) was interrupted. Twenty-five of these patients, of whom 20 had a stroke and five had a TIA, are described in terms of initial symptoms and outcome. The majority had residual symptoms at discharge from hospital. Initial symptoms were vertigo/disturbed balance in 11 of 25 cases. Another three had symptoms perceived as a change in personality and three had a headache. CONCLUSION: From this pilot study, we hypothesise that a fraction of patients with stroke/TIA who call for the EMS have their direct transport to hospital interrupted due to a lack of suspicion of the disease by the EMS nurse at the scene. These patients appear to have more vague symptoms including vertigo and disturbed balance. Instruments to identify these patients at the scene are warranted.